Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> the presumption is "they must be guilty because they're 
> Hispanic" not "they match a description for a specific crime that's been 
> reported".

  Am I being too naive when I make the assumption that it is possible to
check people's IDs without presumption of guilt nor for racist reasons,
even if a choice is made based on typical illegal immigration profiles?

  I do understand people getting angry by such actions, but I really think
it is possible to perform such checks without there being discriminatory
motives behind. The *intent* is not to discriminate, just a honest intent
of catching illegal immigrants. (Of course you can argue that this is not
the most efficient way of doing that, but I'm talking about motivations
and intent. Why is discrimination and racism always assumed as such? Do
we always have to assume the worst about everything and everybody?)

  That was, more or less, my original point in this entire thread, even
if I didn't know how to express myself this clearly back then.

> >   You mean there are people who are complaining about the police
> >   investigating
> > only males in rape cases?

> I'm saying that you don't know the details of every investigation that 
> has ever taken place regarding rape cases in the US.  Or you have a 
> really strange hobby.  The fact that you (or I) are not aware of an 
> instance of this doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

  Of course there always are exceptions. I was talking about normal
occurrences. I don't think it's at all usual for people to complain
about such a thing.

> >   I have heard about criminal profilers on the police force who try to
> > get a picture of what kind of person the criminal might be based on the
> > available clues, and this can include things like ethnicity (such as for
> > example "serial killers are typically white middle-aged males"), but
> > maybe that's just in TV series and movies?

> You're talking about a specific crime.  The point is that there is no 
> *specific* crime in the case of enforcing the AZ law.  In order to 
> prosecute a crime, the prosecution must be able to state with specificity 
> what crime was committed and when.

  Well, one *could* argue that illegal immigration *is* a specific,
existing crime being committed right now... (Not that this justifies
draconian laws and discrimination, but still...)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message